Here is a rough table of machine against performance:
Machine Memory Detail Process Speed
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
P90 8mb 4d T 35% 25fps (DG's tower of power w/ PCI K64)
486dx266 8mb 4d T 70% 25fps
486dx266 4mb 4d T 60% 25fps
486dx266 16mb 4d NT 35% 25fps (Nigel Bovey's)
486dx266 ? 4d T 70% 25fps (MBP's under OS/2)
486dx33 ? 4d T 90% 25fps (Graham A's)
486sx33 4mb 4d NT 66% 25fps
486dx250 24mb 4d NT 95% 25fps (Paul Smyth's w/ ISA ET4000-W32)
486sx25 4mb 4d NT 100% 25fps (a DELL)
486sx25 ? 4d NT 80% 25fps (Nightshade's oldie)
486sx25 4mb 4d NT 100% 23fps (Ben Lester's)
486sx25 2mb 4d NT 100% 21fps
386dx40 4mb 4d NT 100% 20fps
386dx40 2mb 4d NT 100% 20fps (possibly optimistic)
486dx250 24mb 4d NT 100% 18fps (Paul Smyth's w/ ISA S3-924)
386dx33 8mb 4d NT 100% 17fps (DG's old faithful w/ T8900CL)
386sx25 2mb 4d NT 100% 14fps (Stingray's)
It appears that as long as you have at least 2mb of RAM, the actual
amount makes absolutely no difference. The difference between the two
DX2/66s above is attributable to graphics card alone; see the difference
between Paul Smyth's machine with two difference graphics cards
installed.
The details level is shown by the amount of detail around the track, 1d
being the lowest level and 4d the highest, the other detail option is
the track shading, this is shown by T (track shading on), NT (no track
shading). The process column show the average processor occupancy as you
go around any track. This is just a rough estimate, but really shouldn't
go above 100% very much. The final column show the speed in frames per
pecond that this set-up allows.
Even on similar machines, several things will affect speed. A machine
with some external cache will outperform one without; the actual amount
of cache is probably not going to make much difference. Graphics card
performance also makes a big difference; a local bus card will run much
faster that an ISA card, and some cards have better DOS performance than
others (Cirrus Logic based cards are good, ET4000 and derivatives are
even better).
The general consensus seem to be that people would rather have it
running smoother, but with less detail, this shows one of the main
advantages of F1GP over IndyCar, in that it runs quickly on a slow
machine and smooth graphics are possible quite easily.
The Amiga version runs at a similar speed regardless of the machine's
capacity, about 3-5 fps, depending on circuit, even in the fastest 68060
system.
Does the performance vary on an ST? Mail me if it does.
1.1 So how does this affect lap times?
Short answer: it doesn't.
Long answer: it doesn't... directly. DG is in the fortunate position of
having both a P90 and a 386DX/33 on his desk (well, okay, the 386 is
under the desk...), and loaded identical copies of the game up on both
machines. The first and most obvious difference was that the game does
not do a good job of matching "real time" (measured on a stopwatch
during laps on qualifying tyres at Monaco). The first tests were done on
the 386. With 100% to 130% occupancy, the game's timer runs slow, being
about three seconds behind reality. With all the detail turned off and
the occupancy down to about 70% to 110%, it was about three seconds
ahead of reality. With the frame rate reduced and occupancy between 45%
and 75%, it was about 4 seconds behind. Then testing moved to the P90.
With maximum detail and about 33% to 44% occupancy, the timer was about
4 seconds fast.
Now, here's the crunch. Despite these differences, the lap times
reported by the game were very close, all in the 1:14.4 range. The game
was noticeably easier to play at higher frame rates and lower
occupancies. However, with very high occupancies (more than 200%, such
as on the 386 with texture turned on), the difference from real time
becomes very noticeable; the whole game runs in slow motion, and is
potentially easier to play as you get much longer to react. Ivanhoe
Vasiljevich came up with the superb (and very lightly edited)
explanation below.
[...] a high frame rate [as opposed to occupancy] may have its
advantages (my opinion, not proven!):
Using a frame rate of 25 fps means that you have 25
possibilities to perform an action (eg. braking, accelerating)
every second, whereas driving with 16 fps only allows you 16
`slots' per second, to brake, for example.
Assuming that a typical braking maneuver begins at 300 km/h
(188 mph), this equals a speed of 83 m/s, so that at 25 fps
you can take action (brake) every 3.3 m as opposed to every
5.2 m when using 16 fps. (Using an even lower frame rate
naturally worsens the situation. At 8 fps the distance between
two points of action is 10.3 m!) During a normal lap including
many braking maneuvers, this may affect the overall
performance, not to mention techniques like pulsing the
throttle.
In my opinion it would be best to turn off as much detail as
necessary and increase the frame rate as high as possible. (It
may not look as cool, but honestly, who has got the time to
enjoy the beautiful panorama when chasing a new lap record?)
2. What versions are available?
The game was first released on the Amiga and ST with the PC version
following around a year later. The Amiga and ST versions can both be run
of disk and do not need hard drive installation.
GB: As far as I know there are two version of the game for the PC, F1GP
on floppies, which is supplied on 4 high density disks with optional
upgrade disks, and F1GP on CD, which is EXACTLY the same game but on a
silver disk. Do not buy this unless you don't have a floppy drive, since
it costs more and has NO extra features. Quite what MicroProse is
playing at is unknown, but the CD version represents BAD value for your
money.
The game is now reissued by Digital Integration on the PowerPlus budget
label.
DG: Having played both the Amiga and PC versions, I noticed some
important differences. First, some of the tracks are physically
different, Monaco and Imola at least. Second, because of the low frame
rate, the car is much, much harder to set up on the Amiga than the PC;
it's very hard to feel whether the car has any under- or oversteer. It's
also harder to time the turn-in points properly.
3. Why doesn't the modem play work?
If you own the Amiga or Atari ST version then you are out of luck since
the modem support never appeared on either of these versions, the PC
game is the only version with the support.
There is no modem support on the first version (1.01) but this was added
on the updates 1.04 and 1.05, the link option needs two quite fast
machine to work well, on 386SX it is almost unplayable, and the slowest
machine dictates the speed of the other machines; on a 386DX you'll
probably need a 16550 UART to get acceptable performance. If the game
seems to pause a lot or you get regular (but not constant) link data
mismatches, try reducing the frame rate on the slower machine by 20% or
more.
4. Which circuit does it default to around the world?
Well, on the UK version it selects Silverstone as the default GP, in
France it chooses Magny Cours, and in Germany it chooses Hockenheim, so
it looks like it depends on what country you live in! It seems likely,
therefore World Circuit uses Phoenix and the Italian version chooses
Monza.
5. What is the best controller method?
On the Amiga, keyboard or digital joystick seems best.
On the PC, keyboard seems to be preferred by many of the top drivers,
with analog joystick coming a close second. DG: The professional wheel
systems (such as the T1 or ACP) don't seem to work wonderfully. I've had
a few success stories but many people go back to the keyboard!
GB: As an aside, someone mailed me to say that they used a radio control
unit from remote control cars, appropriately wired up. To my mind this
seems like an ideal controller since it has the precision of keyboard
and the analogue-ness of joystick.
6. What is the sound like on a SoundBlaster etc?
Not all that much better unfortunately if anything the PC speaker is
more irritating and thus more realistic! The Amiga sound is reported to
be quite good with a good use of stereo, and the ST is as bad as the PC!
The SoundBlaster support was improved considerably in versions later
than 1.01, but is still poor.
DG: The Amiga sounds good even through a TV. The PC with a SoundBlaster
is okay if you turn it up real loud, but not a patch on the Amiga. A PC
with MT-32 or other MIDI is pathetic, but the music is better. *sigh* I
don't know about the ST, but I'd guess it's better than a PC speaker and
nowhere near as good as the Amiga.
7. I am bored with the game, what now?
Well it has to happen eventually, so what now? You could join one of the
championships on the Net and learn to really hate the game or try either
of these two very sad games...
7.1 Dodgems
The basic idea behind this one is to make your car indestructible and
then wipe out the opposition as fast as possible. Top tip, go backwards
quickly. This is fun for about 30 minutes whilst you do each of the
tracks and marvel at the difference of the courses when viewed from the
other direction.
7.2 Jumping
A particularly rubbish game this, but set your cars up for no down-force
and then drive over the rumble strip and become air borne and see how
far you can get. Remember to save the games as you land so you can show
off to your friends and family...
DG: I've been sent a superb replay of someone calling himself
BeetleHarry jumping right over a car at the first chicane at Hockenhiem.
I'll put it up for FTP soon. If you have any more good crashes or
stunts, send them in!
8. Why is the AI (artificial intelligence) so rubbish?
Who knows, but it reeks doesn't it? There seems to be no real way to
cope with this, except to learn what the other cars do, and avoid any of
there stupid overtaking maneuvers. This is the main area that the game
falls down in, since everything else has been really well written.
One of the areas in which to pay most attention is the pit lane, since
the computer cars will quite happily pull out in front of you as you do
150mph down the lane and so cause a collision. Conversely, watch your
mirrors as you pull out since they appear quite quickly if you are in
the last pit.
On the track, they basically follow the ideal line unless slipstreaming.
If you can get your front wheels ahead of theirs they do move over so
perfect your drafting technique!
9. Why aren't there extension disks?
At the moment there are no extension disks available and none are likely
to become available, this is not through any fault of MicroProse, but
due to the strict licensing agreements with FIA, who are in charge of
the licensing of Grand Prix related material. MicroProse only bought the
rights to the 1991 season so that tracks will have to stay at that
level.
10. Who are the drivers meant to be, and why aren't they?
The game comes supplied with a set of names which bear almost no
relation to the actual drivers names. This is because the drivers would
probably want to be paid for there names, so MicroProse took the cheaper
and more sensible option. The names that are supplied are meant to sound
like names from the same country as the real driver, hence Carlos
Sanchez instead of Ayrton Senna. The correct list of names can be found
at the end of the supplement to the game, and the names for 1993/94 can
be found on the Rec.Autos.Sport.F1 newsgroup.
11. What are the best circuits?
This is a (pretty subjective) top 10 of the tracks as posted by readers
of this. This is an ongoing chart, so send your top three tracks for
qualifying and for racing either seperately or combined to DG.
1. Hockenheim 17
2. Monaco 15
3. Spa 12
4. Magny Cours 10
5. Silverstone 8
6. Adelaide 6
7. Interlagos, Phoenix 5
8. Monza, Imola 2
9. Montreal, Suzuka 1
DG: Personally I love Magny Cours and Hockenheim (except for the
excessive tyre wear during qualifying), Imola, Monza, and Adelaide, and
I hate Suzuka and Phoenix. Everywhere else is somewhere in-between. The
tracks are also subtly different between the PC and ST/Amiga. Some
tracks are much more fun to race at than qualify, and others vice versa.
12. I'm in love with the author, who is he?
The author of the game is Geoff Crammond, he has been responsible for
most of the innovative games to appear in the auto simulation world, he
previously wrote the original version of Revs for the BBC Micro. It was
based on F3000 (or F3) racing at Silverstone (the old circuit without
the Vale complex). The track was quite accurately reproduced and the
game played quite quickly. The game had practice, qualifying and race
sessions like F1GP, but it didn't have pits and you started your
practice and race sessions out on the track! There was also an expansion
pack released which contained four other British tracks [GB: I think two
of them were Oulton Park and Snetterton].
He then wrote Stunt Car Racer for the Amiga/ST which was as it's name
suggests was a stunt car racing game. The main aim of the game was to
race another stunt car around an elevated circuit, trying not to fall
off. Getting in your way were large gaps in the circuit which had to be
jumped by hitting a ramp at the right speed. Too slow and you went down
the hole, too fast and you cracked the chassis. When the chassis was
fully cracked, your race was over. The best part about this game was the
two player serial option which allowed you to push your mates off the
track. This information from Andy Coates.
The rest of the programming team seems to be members of his close
family! The only other name that jumps out is that of Pete Cook who
wrote some of the best games on the Sinclair ZX Spectrum. Interestingly
he was involved with the game Grand Prix from CRL which attempted to
simulate the management of a GP team. It was very simple but great fun.
13. What do the real drivers think?
There have been two drivers who have commented on the game, they are
Oliver Gavin, and Derek Warwick. Gavin is a top F3 driver who, according
to MicroProse, played the game on a friends Amiga before the race at
Spa, and the went on to win it!
"Because part of the circuit is on the public road, Oliver
couldn't practice on the circuit", explains Geoff, "so he used
F1GP to learn the track, took pole position and won the race."
Derek Warwick on the other hand drove for the F1 team Arrows/Footwork
(who helped write the game!) and gave it a glowing write up in Autosport
Magazine, just before the Canadian GP. He gave some lap times but they
were very poor, and he had to drive with full help. This provoked a
spate of letters to the magazine from people asking for his job! Also, a
Canadian driver contacted him to say how accurate the Montreal course
was.
The date of the Autosport article would be nice.*
14. How do I make the (PC) game more challenging?
Aside from using the editor to speed up the opposition, the easiest ways
to make the game more difficult are to turn of Traction and Steering
Help, both of these options are listed off the Games Control menu, in
the Accelerating and Steering menus respectively. With these off the
game becomes a good deal harder, but it still leaves a lot to be
desired.
Several top Hall Of Fame drivers report that driving with Traction Help
off, whilst harder, also improves lap times at many circuits, primarily
those with many slow corners.
15. Why does the installation fail on the PC?
When installing the game unpacks some large files. On a fragmented hard
disk there might not be a large enough free block for them and the
Installation will crash with a very unhelpful message. Just run a
defragmenter on the hard drive, such as Norton Speed Disk or the one
supplied with MS-DOS 6, the game should then install no problem.
Another potential problem pointed out to me is that the game copies all
the Data files onto hard disk before decompressing them, and this
effectively doubles the amount of space it uses at installation time, so
make sure you have plenty of free hard disk space, as this will cure
both this problem and the one above.
16. What are these modem menus?
If you hex edit the .EXE file from version 1.00 you will find some
references to modems and COM links, these menus are not enabled and you
will have to upgrade to access the link option.
17. What the difference between WC and F1GP?
There seems to be no difference apart from the name, with the version
numbers staying consistent with each other. The only difference is the
loading screens (see separate question).
18. What are the WC gif files?
These files are used in the US version of GP, known as World Circuit.
19. Why does the car steer itself sometimes?
This effect is most noticeable in the pits, when the car is pulled into
the correct lane as you drive past, though the computer 'aids' you
steering as you go round every course. The reason for this is the
Steering Help option set in the Game Controls, Steering, menu. This
feature is there to help users who driver using the keyboard or a
standard joystick, since they find it hard to make slight course
adjustments. The only way to disable this feature in a race is to put
the car in the 'turning gear' you can then steer the car anywhere you
want in the pits etc, thought quite why you would want to...
20. How are the pit bays allocated?
This is more of a general GP question than specific to the game, but the
pits are given out according to the numbers that the teams car carry, so
McLaren has cars 1 and 2, and pit number 1, and so on. There seems to be
a bit of a bug in the game when you drive as car no 1 or 2, in that at
some courses it is very hard to get into the pit bay correctly! The
corner is too sharp and with the steering help on, you almost always
over shoot. DG: Can't say as I've noticed this, but then again I slow
down on the pit lane like you're supposed too.
21. What happens if I overshoot my pit?
To put it simply, you cannot over shoot your pit (unless steering help
is turned off) the computer will always try and pull you in. This means
that you can be parked at very strange angles, but this does not seem to
hurt your stop time, though the get-away may become more difficult! (Of
course, some people would consider this cheating!)
22. Is there a difference in car performance?
With the performance set to Random or 1991 Levels the cars do vary in
speed, except for the car you are driving. For this reason there is no
point in choosing car No 1, just because it should be 10% faster like
real life since the performance of human cars is always the same.
23. Why does the game sometimes slow down?
The graphics for generating the pit-lane are quit complex and so your
occupancy will always rise when in the pits, though this isn't usually
too much of a problem. The only other place where the game seems to slow
is the back straight at Phoenix and the second straight at Hockenheim.
The slow down at Phoenix is probably due to the large buildings it has
to draw, the one at Hockenheim because of the number of trees. Turn down
the detail if you notice a slowdown and don't like it.
24. F1GP version 2?
24.1 The rumors
The rumors at the moment are just that, so please take all this with a
large pinch of salt. A UK gaming magazine did a prediction of the top 40
games for 1994, on the list was F1GP 2, which it said was being written
by Crammond and was scheduled for March release.
The other rumor was in an interview with Papyrus software, they were
asked if they were worried that F1GP 2 was being written, or that
Crammond might be working on an Indy Car game of his own.
In the August 1993 issue of Amiga Format Games Special, Crammond said
that he was working on a new racing game, but no other details were
given. According to the MicroProse BBS in the US there will be an F1GP 2
released later in the year. (Phew!)
Current rumors indicate a summer '95 release, perhaps in August. Any
news appreciated!
24.2 Wish list (are you reading this MicroProse?)
Here is the current wish list compiled from suggestions mailed to GB on
the net.
1. Better AI.
2. Variable weather in races.
3. Still run on 386 with 1mb.
4. Keep the graphics fast and smooth, not too much detail. Gizmo's
corollary: much better graphics for Pentium owners.
5. Better in game information about the state of the other cars
6. Proper external cameras with zoom, like in IndyCar.
7. Better accidents and have the computer cars fall off a bit more
often.
8. Pit boards for better information.
9. Other pit to car communications.
10. The cars can break down. (With option to turn off, of course!)
11. Linkable version on the Amiga and ST.
12. A full Amiga AGA version with 256 colors.
13. A network version! (26 players at once!)
14. Sand traps, so that you can't take a short cut.
-- Dave "Gizmo" Gymer Telephone +44 (0)1268 534228
-- General DataComm Advanced Research Centre Ltd, Basildon, UK
-- dgy...@gdcarc.co.uk (preferred) or Dave.Gy...@laUNChpad.unc.edu